October 11, 2005
The BuzzFlash Mailbag
The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Read the BuzzFlash FAQ for info on submitting to the Mailbag.
Subject: Qualifications for being President
For eleven years, I was a movie theater manager. Once during an election almost 20 years ago, I asked my City Manager who he was voting for in the Presidential race.
"Neither one. There's nobody running for President that I'd hire to run a theater."
That's a funny joke, but recently I have seen the truth in it.
As a manager, the largest staff I had was 50, with a management staff of 5. The quality I tried to find most in Assistant Managers was not only the ability to handle their current problems but the ones that would arise. It wasn't enough to make sure all the 7 pm shows were cleaned and that someone was threading the movie. They also had to make sure the ticket and food sellers had enough change and supplies for the next rush.
I wanted my managers to be ready for NOW and more importantly for LATER. To think ahead for the problems that might and would arise.
Katrina, Rita and the non-exit plan for Iraq show that not only do Bush and his gang have no idea how to handle current problems, they are also ignoring planning for those that will come later.
They can't meet my standards to run a theater staff of 50 people, how can we expect them to plan for an entire nation?
The answer is, we can't.
And when I had managers who couldn't handle the job, I replaced them.
That's how I kept the theater running.
From the article with the headline "Saddam may face execution before standing trial on all charges"
"It will weigh charges that they massacred 143 people in Dujail"
My question: 143 people... isn't that about how many Iraqis die every week now as a result of American efforts to bring that country under their thumb? I'm sure that's a low-ball figure, as 40 Iraqi's were killed just today.
You are right, Saddam may not get a chance to tell His-Story. History is written by the victors.
"Baha Araji, a Shiite assemblyman said. "We want them to carry out the capital punishment as soon as possible."
I guess there will be 144 Iraqis who die that day.
A BuzzFlash reader
Dear Buzzers --
I vented all the expletives (for once!) BEFORE I started this message. But all I could think is -- imagine what we could do with that $6 billion/per month if we were spending it here at home, rather than on a pointless, hopeless war that we were lied into. (Well, some of us were; I wasn't. Unlike John Kerry, I opposed it from the outset. Not that I could do anything to stop the march to death and destruction. But at least I tried.)
Here's a partial list of what that $6 billion/per month could do right here in America. (1) Feed the poor and house the homeless. Right here at home. (2) Pay overworked/underpaid teachers enough to make "No Child Left Behind" a reality instead of the farce it is today. (3) Obviously, bring back our troops before more lives are lost for nothing worthy of fighting for. (4) Related to (3), give some of that monthly $6 billion to the civilians in Iraq whose sons and daughters and parents we've destroyed -- and help them to rebuild their own lives, on their own terms. (5) Fund college educations for students whose families can't afford to pay for them -- thereby dooming their kids to futures at Wal-Mart or McDonalds. (6) Pay more for Medicaid and Medicare so that the poor and seniors no longer need to choose between food and medicine. (7) Clean up the environment. (8) If necessary, bribe those drivers of honkin' SUVs/Hummers to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles. (9) Related to #8: Cut fuel emissions and other pollutants to STOP global warming, of which, globally, WE (the USA) are probably the single greatest cause. (10) Feed the hungry and protect the helpless and/or homeless on a global scale.
I have many more (!) suggestions, but I'll stop at 10. My point: if we can "afford" to spend $6 billion per month on an insane war in Iraq, we can certainly afford to spend it for better purposes both at home and abroad. Somebody should tell the Chimp in Chief that the "God" he thinks is directing him is probably a poor imitation of the Wizard of Oz -- and that he'd better shape up soon or face the flames.
Barb in Athens, GA
A BuzzFlash reader
Subject: So Let Me See If I Have This Right
When You Spoke to God, He Told You to Torture People.
The American people now have a stark choice between good and evil; between those who advocate the "systemic, blatant and sadistic" (Taguba Report) treatment of prisoners or those who don't. Anyone who continues to support the current administration or who fails to support the efforts to have them removed from office and held accountable for their crimes is equally complicit in their immoral, unethical and criminal conduct.
In the five years that the presidency of George Bush has afflicted this nation, not once has he chosen to veto a bill. This was due to the unwavering support that the President received from the Republican Congress. Once Upon a time, George Bush could poop on a roll, call it a hotdog, and the entire Republican congress would run to the Capital lunchroom to get the mustard. Now things are a little different.
I have stated, in the past, that Republicans are often on the same page as Democrats, it just usually takes them about ten years to realize what Democrats have known all along. But this time the utter failure of the Bush Abomination has cut the learning curve in half.
Finally the Republican Senate has decided that The Bush Abomination has even exceeded their overly tolerant standards (not including of course, private acts between consenting adults) on what is moral behavior. Senator John McCain of Arizona brought to the Senate floor a bill that would forbid "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment" of prisoners in US custody.
A three hour recess was then called, so that the Senate could muster all available federal resources to scour the Capital in search of spines for the Republican side of the aisle. They were only able to turn up 45. So at the end of the day, 90 Senators stood together and opposed torture while 9, all Republicans, flopped around on the floor of the Senate, in gelatinous opposition.
The amendment was then attached to the $435 billion Pentagon appropriations bill, which the White House now says the President will veto. Yep, that makes sense.
Irony upon irony; the president will prevent the troops from getting the funding that they need to fight the insurgents so that the Bush Abomination can create more insurgents. Yep, that makes sense.
And what will we call it?
Just plain stupid.
Subject: Bring It On Productions Presents
"BRING IT ON" THE BUSH/ROVE PRODUCTION COMPANY, PRESENTS; PHOTO OPS:
Today Mr. Bush donned a hard hat and a hammer and was back in the disaster areas for the umpteenth time encouraging Americans to pitch in and help the victims. Certainly that can be looked at as a good message, but hammering a few nails in plywood will not distract attention from his court nominee or the fact that his Administration and his Republican Party has a black cloud of corruption hanging over their heads that could destroy all the good intentions or photo ops. Using the taxpayer money for continuous expensive trips, when one or two would get his point across, could be seen as extravagant when the poor of the area could better use the money! Paul Krugman points out in his op-ed,"Will Bush Deliver":
"I'm not sure why the news media haven't made more of the White House role in stalling a bipartisan bill that would have extended Medicaid coverage to all low-income hurricane victims - some of whom, according to surveys, can't afford needed medicine. The White House has also insisted that disaster loans to local governments, many of which no longer have a tax base, be made with the cruel and unusual provision that these loans cannot be forgiven".
THE BUSH FAMILY RANCH
Driving in a pickup with the dogs, clearing brush, bringing in bales of hay to make it look more "ranchy" and Barney digging for armadillos????
So, in short, we have a "president" who, ON THE SAME DAY -- November 7,
Apparently Rancho Boguso has done time not just as a small-time cattle ranch but was once a pig farm as well! And those horses you see in photos? Window dressing only -- Bush can't ride!!! Another fact is that he doesn't own any of the cattle on his "ranch." They are the cattle of the previous owner, who helps run the "Movie Set."
He's a cowboy with more hat than cattle. The whole idea behind the ranch set, of course, was so that the public could be treated to footage of Bush seeking a quiet "retreat" at the family ranch. Americans would thus assume that the ranch was a rooted family homestead or compound like the one Kennedy's had in Martha's Vineyard or FDR had at Campobello. But when Bush retreated into his "homestead" in November, 2000, he was merely walking onto a prepared set upon which the paint had barely dried, let alone even the barest of roots put down! When we see photos of Bush bombing around the ranch in his leather jacket in his "ole pickup," supposedly knowing every tree and bush -- it's all pure fantasy!
A BuzzFlash reader
Subject: Alternative Op-Ed Sources
Thank you thank you thank you for providing alternative sources for Paul Krugman's and Bob Herbert's columns, since the NY Times chose to put them behind "the wall". You people are great, and I'm a big, big fan.
|back to top|